From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3933 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2013 14:40:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 3921 invoked by uid 89); 25 Nov 2013 14:40:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from Unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 14:40:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rAPEe0NA019780 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:40:00 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rAPEdwFB030652; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:39:59 -0500 Message-ID: <5293613E.2080709@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 14:51:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Tedeschi, Walfred" CC: "yao@codesourcery.com" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] Fix PR16193 - gdbserver aborts. References: <1385386802-16948-1-git-send-email-walfred.tedeschi@intel.com> <52935D6A.1060301@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00773.txt.bz2 On 11/25/2013 02:32 PM, Tedeschi, Walfred wrote: > This should be the fix. The issue was that the buffer size was not matching the size actually read. I'm staring at the patch, and not seeing what the actual functional change was. Can you point it out? That's the sort of thing that helps review, and that is good to have in the email/commit log -- a rationale for the fix, an explanation of what was wrong, how the fix actually fixes it, etc. > Macro was really broken, for any XCR0 value it was returning 576, as pointed by Joel: > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-11/msg00761.html > > I have tested the macros on an ad-hoc application to verify its functionality. > > Do you still see the issue when applying this? I haven't tried it yet. I'll do that now. Thanks, -- Pedro Alves